No actually I'm serious,,, and perhaps it is becuz you have more sandy lawns than I do, but even with the artificial topsoil covering, I don't think any one could tell the difference between a typical N treated lawn with adequate moisture or one that had that PLUS micros...

Actually they sell micros in the form of pulverized sand... you get 72 micros in the form of pulverized sand... It seems to me that microbes would be mining that sand w/out the need of pulverization...

Regardless, I'd be interestted in hearing from anyone who had N rich turf , yet noticed an improvement after applying micros... and what was the soil test results before the application of the micronutrients???

__________________
*
Now that I know that clay's texture(platelets) has nothing to do with water infiltration, percolation, or drainage,,, I wonder what does...
*

All good argument fella's.
I often wonder some of these questions and arguments as I have time while sitting on a Z-Turn.
I am using 24/6/12 fert with 2% Fe and Micro's. I see dramatic results from the fertilizer as the nitrogen is in the U-Flexx form. Be it the nitrogen combination with the Fe and S that is making the change over. I see the same results from using 46.0.0 to 21.0.0.24S. Do I really think that the extra money spent on a fancy labeled material is making things better for all.
My fert isn't bursting out the turfgrass with the flurry of top growth that the other fast release N is providing. I guess there needs to be a real study performed at the collegiate level on actual micro absorption into plant tissue.
I inquired a few threads ago about Sea Salt products that is sold in my state that enhances forage crop yields. There is a 100% guarantee on the bag. The cost is just 8.00 per acre for treatments and the yields is questionable.
I noticed one more time in the last 4 years as our area was subject to poundings from hurricane's Catrina, Ike and Issac. Each time these Tropical Storms came northward into Arkansas, the rains were torrential. Within three days of the liquid sunshine, the lawns transformed into something of great majesty. Need I say that the results we get from our usual Oklahoma rains and Missouri rains is nothing in comparison. The water absorbed by the ocean........full of micronutrient rich elements.........makes things explode with color and growth. So, can the results of micro's be sustained as beneficial? Does the Sea Salt material really make a benefit?
I can only see what happens and make judgement from product responses based on what the eye sees. Sometime's I question the science behind all of these products that seem to pass the inspection.

No actually I'm serious,,, and perhaps it is becuz you have more sandy lawns than I do, but even with the artificial topsoil covering, I don't think any one could tell the difference between a typical N treated lawn with adequate moisture or one that had that PLUS micros...

Actually they sell micros in the form of pulverized sand... you get 72 micros in the form of pulverized sand... It seems to me that microbes would be mining that sand w/out the need of pulverization...

Regardless, I'd be interestted in hearing from anyone who had N rich turf , yet noticed an improvement after applying micros... and what was the soil test results before the application of the micronutrients???

My typical lawn has been pounded with Scotts, AG grade 16-15-15 or 10-30-10. Soil test results indicate problems with Ca/Mg, P overload, and micronutrient deficiencies. Oh, yes, there have been results lettered in red directing me to withhold N and P applications until need is indicated via either testing or deficiency symptoms. On my atypical lawn that has not seen fertilizer in decades, N response is there, however that happens at rates which push surge growth. I get my green from a micronutrient mix emphasizing Fe, Mg, and Mn. You once asked me about adding compost. Now why would I do that to soil that already has at least 5% OM? On lawns where that has been done, there is a short lived fertilizer response disproportionate to the material and labor cost. I am also familiar with non chelated dry micronutrient compositions. Response is lacking unless they are applied to acidic soils. Something I do not normally see. The acidic soils are the ones that do not have the nutrient issues of soils in the 7.0 and up range

My typical lawn has been pounded with Scotts, AG grade 16-15-15 or 10-30-10. Soil test results indicate problems with Ca/Mg, P overload, and micronutrient deficiencies. Oh, yes, there have been results lettered in red directing me to withhold N and P applications until need is indicated via either testing or deficiency symptoms. On my atypical lawn that has not seen fertilizer in decades, N response is there, however that happens at rates which push surge growth. I get my green from a micronutrient mix emphasizing Fe, Mg, and Mn. You once asked me about adding compost. Now why would I do that to soil that already has at least 5% OM? On lawns where that has been done, there is a short lived fertilizer response disproportionate to the material and labor cost. I am also familiar with non chelated dry micronutrient compositions. Response is lacking unless they are applied to acidic soils. Something I do not normally see. The acidic soils are the ones that do not have the nutrient issues of soils in the 7.0 and up range

I'm intrigued by your soils in Hawai'i. Soils in warmer climates often have less OM than those in cooler climates, since weather is conducive to microbal breakdown of OM for longer periods. While soils in the Upper Midwest may have OM in the 4 to 5% range, those in the southeast are usually in the 1 to 2% range.

Neither the mollisols or andisols that make up the majority of Hawai'i soils are high in OM -- in fact, they are notorious for very low OM, even with prolific OM produces growing on them.

My typical lawn has been pounded with Scotts, AG grade 16-15-15 or 10-30-10. Soil test results indicate problems with Ca/Mg, P overload, and micronutrient deficiencies. Oh, yes, there have been results lettered in red directing me to withhold N and P applications until need is indicated via either testing or deficiency symptoms. On my atypical lawn that has not seen fertilizer in decades, N response is there, however that happens at rates which push surge growth. I get my green from a micronutrient mix emphasizing Fe, Mg, and Mn. You once asked me about adding compost. Now why would I do that to soil that already has at least 5% OM? On lawns where that has been done, there is a short lived fertilizer response disproportionate to the material and labor cost. I am also familiar with non chelated dry micronutrient compositions. Response is lacking unless they are applied to acidic soils. Something I do not normally see. The acidic soils are the ones that do not have the nutrient issues of soils in the 7.0 and up range

Sounds to me that you guys might have to put a P ban on Scott's and once you get your soil balanced then you should be good to go...

The last thing noticable on our lawns, "pounded by squirt&fert" along with water was , aeration... made a real difference in the way the lawn colored... I'm sure the cooler weather had something to do with the pleasant color change as well, however, the squirt&fert will always take the credit... cause and effect, are very difficult to nail down...

The credit always goes to the exotic, fancy label...

__________________
*
Now that I know that clay's texture(platelets) has nothing to do with water infiltration, percolation, or drainage,,, I wonder what does...
*

I'm intrigued by your soils in Hawai'i. Soils in warmer climates often have less OM than those in cooler climates, since weather is conducive to microbal breakdown of OM for longer periods. While soils in the Upper Midwest may have OM in the 4 to 5% range, those in the southeast are usually in the 1 to 2% range.

Neither the mollisols or andisols that make up the majority of Hawai'i soils are high in OM -- in fact, they are notorious for very low OM, even with prolific OM produces growing on them.

Interesting ....

The ideal situation is when the mollisol or andisol is left in place. Reality is all of that is scraped off, a base course of coral is installed and an oxisol based subsoil is laid on top of it. If one looks at a soil series map, there should not be oxisols outside of central Oahu, I find that soil series all over then entire island. The structure and positive properties of an oxisol are destroyed by contamination with salt and alkalinity.